Vipond v. Townsend

60 N.W. 430, 88 Wis. 285, 1894 Wisc. LEXIS 61
Wisconsin Supreme Court·Decided October 2, 1894·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Newman, J.

It was not error to include the amount of the stipulated attorney’s fee in the judgment. The stipulation for the fee was a part of the contract on which the action was based. It became due as soon as the action was commenced. It was due at the time of the entry of judgment. Its recovery was incidental to the recovery upon the principal cause of action. This is analogous to the [287]*287uniform practice, from an earty day, of including stipulated attorney’s fees in foreclosure judgments. It has not been suspected that a separate action could be maintained for the recovery of such fees.

By the Court.— The judgment of the superior court of Douglas county is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Vipond v. Townsend, 60 N.W. 430, 88 Wis. 285, 1894 Wisc. LEXIS 61 (Wis. 1894).

60 N.W. 430 (Vipond v. Townsend) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Citizens Nat. Bank of Orange, Va. v. Waugh
78 F.2d 325 (Fourth Circuit, 1935)
Davis v. Cochran
76 Miss. 439 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1898)
Pirie v. Stern
72 N.W. 370 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1897)
Byers v. Bellan-Price Investment Co.
10 Colo. App. 74 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 1897)